The philosophy that running away from social issues will help the Republican Party, expressed by Dennis Miligan (the only candidate who has expressed interest in taking Gilbert Baker's place as Chair of the Republican Party) is totally illogical. 1 First, that philosophy runs counter to actual facts enumerated below. Second, anyone stating that philosophy has not counted the costs of such a move. In fact, that philosophy is just as absurd and dangerous as is Democrat Harry Reid's public statement that we've already lost the war in Iraq. Taking that stand will do nothing but guarantee defeat. (See link above for Dennis Miligan's quotes or the end of this post.)

If Republicans lose this war on social issues, then we will have one of two choices: give up our Christian values or be persecuted and go to jail for them. If that statement seems too strong, just consider that on a 9 to 4 vote the Democrats on the US Rules committee just defeated a proposed amendment exempting the reading of the Bible from hate crime prosecution. The words of that amendment read, "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the [hate crime] bill," If that is not scary, what is? 2 And hundreds of students in California were suspended for wearing Bible verses on their shirts in California just recently. 3

There are numerous facts and events that prove the big loss for Republicans came from other sources rather than from a conservative stand on social issues. In fact, Republicans lost way more votes from caving on social issues than by supporting them. President Bush and other Republican leaders lost support of hundreds of thousands of voters by their leniency on illegal immigration. The same can be said about several other issues.

I. If social issues like traditional marriage vs same sex marriage are now winning issues for the the Republican Party,

A. Then just why have 27 states passed constitutional amendments to protect traditional marriage by margins as high as 8-1? In only one state where an attempt was made to pass such an amendment did it fail. In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. 4

B. And why did Governor Mike Beebe, Lt. Governor Bill Halter and other Democratic candidates all feign allegiance to traditional marriage and oppose homosexual adoption of children until AFTER being elected? During the campaign even Jason Willett, chairman of the state Democratic Party, said he "had a problem with the adoption of children by gay parents." 5 II. If social issues like gun control are hurting Republican candidates,

A. Then why have the Democrats been running away from gun control issues since 2000? "We've gone backwards in a lot of areas," says Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. 6

B. And why did Governor Mike Beebe run advertisements for months and months about hunting and about his support of gun ownership?.

IV. If social issues like Illegal Immigration are hurting the Republican Party,

A. Why did only 7% of the members of Tom Tancredo's Immigrating Reform Caucus lose their seats in the election in November 06 when among all Republican seats in Congress, the rate of loss was 12%, almost twice as high? (Most of you have not seen these statistics anywhere) 7

B. Why is Ted Kennedy talking about supporting border patrol and sending O'Reilly emails about his new stand? Ted Kennedy recently voted (2006) for an amendment to H.R. 5631, to provide for $1.8 billion for the construction of 370 miles of border fencing. He had tried to kill this bill and voted against it six times in the past. 8

F. And why did the bill that failed by only 2 votes to allow illegal alien students to get in-state tuition and scholarships a couple years ago not get anywhere this last session?

IV. Why did we defeat the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in Arkansas and the nation and vote down the hate crime bill nine times in Arkansas if the citizens and Republicans are not on the right side of these issues?

IV. If social issues like abortion are not winning issues for Republican candidates,

A. Then why did a Gallop poll show in 2004 that the attitude of Pro-life rose from 33% to 43% and Pro-choice declined from 56% to 48%? 12 Why has Republican President Candidate Mitt Romney switched his position on abortion to Pro-Life?

B. Why did the US Supreme Court recently uphold a national ban on partial birth abortions and rule that the government has “a legitimate and substantial interest in preserving and promoting fetal life.”? The 5-4 decision marks the first time the court has upheld a ban on an abortion procedure. 13

The answer to that last question is basically the correct answer to all the questions above. The ban was upheld because Republicans kept social issues in the forefront, and a Republican President was finally able to get two conservative judges on the Court that upheld such a ban. Many Democrats, Christians, and other political party adherents worked on the issues, but this Supreme Court decision allowing ban on partial birth abortion was accomplished through the Republican party. As most of you know, I have many, many complaints with the Republican Party and have expressed them publicly many times, but I have to give credit where credit is due. I also have respect for many Arkansas Democrats who have fought hard on the right side for many of these issues, but their Party as a whole has not.

The same can be said about all the other issues in the questions presented above. In all those issues - traditional marriage, homosexual adoption, illegal immigration, 2nd Amendment rights and gun control, ERA, and many other issues- the Republican party as a whole has represented the "silent majority" and has been a mighty tool to preserve our traditional culture.

And don't forget the US hate crime bill mentioned in the first paragraph and who is standing for the right on that issue. All the Republicans on the Judiciary committee voted against the hate crime bill, and all the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee voted for the hate crime bill. In the full House, 166 Republicans voted against it and 212 Democrats voted for it. Only 25 Republicans voted for it. And nine Democrats on the Rules committee voted to reject the amendment, "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the bill." Four Republicans voted for the amendment. 14

Can Republican afford to bail out on social issues? If we do so, we will lose ALL, even our very freedom and probably most elections.

2 Comments:

d pelley said...

It is no wonder that the biased media would like to convince the Republicans that social issues are hurting them. They have always been on the side of the Democrats and are only being used as their tools now. After all, as Phyllis Schlafly said, "Democrats who won on November 7 did so by dressing in Republican clothes and pretending to be pro-life or pro-gun or pro-marriage." The liberal Democrats and the media would like nothing better than for the Republicans to back off on these issues and give the liberals a free ride.

Republicans would be wise to look elsewhere for real facts as to why the Republicans lost so heavily in 2006. "Almost every one of the Republican Members of Congress who bit the dust in the 2006 election had been an enthusiastic booster of the globalists' agenda: NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO (World Trade Organization), Fast Track, PNTR (Permanent Normal Trading Relations), and Free Trade Agreements (FTA) with countries most Americans never heard of. Republicans were badly on the defensive in the face of Democrat ads touting the issue of jobs." 15

Numerous Republican local candidates lost elections based on the voters' displeasure with the President . On exit polls in 2006, "When asked what the extremely important issues of the election were, 42% of respondents said "corruption in Washington," 40% said "terrorism," nearly 39% said "the economy," and 37% said "Iraq." When asked if they approve or disapprove of the war in Iraq, 57% said disapprove and 41% said approve. It is totally illogical, therefore, to believe that the Republicans' stand on social issues lost the elections for Republicans. 16

Despite the accomplishments of the Republican leaders, the leaders have failed miserably at times, but they have never failed as much as they will if they choose to move away from social issues.

Note: In the above paragraphs I did not say I agreed with the majority on the Iraq war. Following are two links to a wonderful letter to the editor and an article that exemplify why we can't cut and run in that situation. The letter to the editor also exemplifies why we can't give up on our battles. The article begins with this sentence." The most remarkable part of the Democratic effort to mandate defeat in Iraq is the adamant refusal of any Democrat to discuss the possible consequences" http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/187566/. The letter to the editor points to many other leaders who could have given up and what those consequences to our country would have been. Both these speak to the issues detailed here. 17 http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/189525/print/

Quote by Dennis Miligan from article on the "GOP trying to rebuild with new faces: "On May 19, the party will hold a special election for Baker's replacement but so far only one candidate has expressed interest.

State GOP treasurer and Saline County Republican Chairman Dennis Milligan said he believes he can help the party re-energize its supporters by focusing on fiscal, rather than social, issues. In last year's election, the state GOP often ran on social hot-button issues such as illegal immigration, gay marriage and abortion.

"Focus on less taxes and smaller government, some of the core issues that we believe in," Milligan said. "I think the voters spoke very strongly. A lot of our people at the ballot box did express their unhappiness with the direction that the Republican Party was headed."

With respect to Arkansas, I do not think the Republican Party is significant. I doubt it will ever be significant.

On the other hand, I do think there is a statewide socially conservative majority that is unengaged or uninformed or both and, most definitely, not "networked." Successful conservatism cannot be merely reactive within a small group of people who talk among themselves; it must look forward, and it must communicate with this broader base. That is why I treasure your work and the work of the bloggers at The Citizens Journal. First the seed and then the flower.

And this work should not be strictly related to party. A correct vote by a blue-dog Democrat is just as good as a correct vote by a Republican.